Tripod legs with 4 sections

Does anyone have experience with a 4-section tripod? Is it stable?

I currently have a Manfrotto 190XB, which weighs 4 pounds, supports 11 pounds and folds to 21 inches. I never use it with a lens longer than 400.

The only thing wrong with it is - several of my friends are consistently telling me to get a heavier, sturdier, taller tripod. It's good to listen to your friends, and that includes when they nag.

I have a requirement, though, that makes this a bit difficult - the tripod has to fit into carry-on luggage, so it must fold up to 22-23 inches maximum. Why carry on? Because I'm concerned that a trip will be ruined if I check any of my critical gear and it gets lost in transit.

I'm looking at the Manfrotto 055CXPRO4. Although it's about the same weight as the 190XB, it supports 17.6 pounds, where the 190XB supports 11. Also, the 055CXPRO4 is 6 inches taller than the 190XB without the center column extended.

Any suggestions, please? Comments appreciated.

Lance:

I have a 4-section Gitzo GT2941 Basalt tripod that folds to 22", weighs 3.7 pounds, and supports 22 pounds. I use it with a Markins M-20 ball head and a Wimberly Sidekick, and it securely supports my Nikon D300 camera on a 13-pound Sigma 300-800 mm lens.

Unfortunately, according to B&H photo, this tripod has been discontinued and replaced by a leveling model (Gitzo GT2941LLVL) that supports the same 22 pounds but itself weighs 4.2 pounds and unfortunately folds to 26" (too long for you).

I think my Gitzo GT2941 Basalt tripod, which is similar in weight and strength to carbon fiber but considerably less expensive, would serve you well if you could locate one. You might Google it, or search on eBay.

Norm Dulak

Lance I went from the Bogen 3021 pro to the Feison CT3371 for my D300 Nikon 500 f/4 setup and so far really like it. It took a little getting used to the rotating knobs instead of the bogen clamps, but other than that really find it sturdier, www.reallybigcameras sells them. They sell four and three section tripods. I always check my tripod, putting it among the clothes. It is just too much of a bother otherwise. So far have had no problems.

Hi Lance:

I switched from the Manfrotto 055XB to the Feisol CT3301. I bought it directly from Feisol for $215 plus shipping. It is carbon fiber and the quality is every bit as good as my Gitzo GT3530LS. You might want to take a look at the four section version, the Feisol CT3401. The Feisol tripods are sweet with Markins heads. I use the Markins M10 because I never use that tripod for anything bigger than my 300 F4 w/teleconverter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lance Warley

I'm looking at the Manfrotto 055CXPRO4. Although it's about the same weight as the 190XB, it supports 17.6 pounds, where the 190XB supports 11. Also, the 055CXPRO4 is 6 inches taller than the 190XB without the center column extended.

Any suggestions, please? Comments appreciated.

---

I own a 055CXPRO4 and used to use it it on an 800. It stood but oscillated very much on very slight wind. Now if we applied Gitzo's weight criteria to what focal length works with the Manfrotto you could use it with anything under 200mm.

For my purpose I am assigning my 055CXPRO4 with 200/2L IS and a 300/2.8L IS. It'll vibrate somewhat but at 4-5kg it is under the spec'd max load of 8kg.

Which 400mm are you planning to use this with? If with the 400/2.8L IS forget it and get a higher capacity legs. Your trip would be ruined if it topples over.

I use a Gitzo 3540 LS 4 section unit and like it a lot. I went with 4 legs for the short collapsed length and have found no difficulties holding my pro body, 500 f4, extender, and flash on a side kick with a RRS BH 55 head. I believe the "G Lock" of the Gitzo tripods make the 4 sections especially stable.

Thanks, everyone.

I should have added - I plan to use this tripod almost exclusively with relatively light lenses for landscape shots - the 17-40L and 24-105L lenses. Also, I will rarely use it with a 100-400 or with a 400 5.6.

Lance: I use a Gitzo 3541 4 section tripod with a Wimberly head for my 500 f/4. I realize this is bigger than you need, but I went through the decision process of 3 sections or 4 when I bought that tripod. The weight bearing capacity of the 3531 (3 section) and 3541 were identical. I asked around to many people who were using heavy lenses and a wimberly. All of the folks indicated that the 4 section worked well. I've had mine for about a year. It has been great and certainly packs a bit easier than the 3 section.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lance Warley

Thanks, everyone.

I should have added - I plan to use this tripod almost exclusively with relatively light lenses for landscape shots - the 17-40L and 24-105L lenses. Also, I will rarely use it with a 100-400 or with a 400 5.6.

---

Lance:

In view of your relatively modest load requirements, I have another suggestion: A Benro C-169 M8 tripod, which is part of Benro's "Travel Angel" series. And it absolutely is an angel for travel. Here is a summary of the specs:

8X carbon fiber construction, 5 sections
Folds to a mere 14" for travel (I carry mine in a shoulder bag on airplanes)
Maximum height without the column extended, 48"; 58.3" with the column fully extended
Tripod weight, 2.2 pounds, but supports 17.6 pounds
1/4"-20 & 3/8" reversible stud to fit almost all ball heads
Currently $333.95 at B & H

I'm a fairly tall guy at 6' 2", so I add my Wimberley Sidekick (carried in a tube sock, also in my shoulder bag) to my Markins ball head for a bit more extension.

The combo works like a charm, as I learned on a recent trip to California. There, I used the setup to support a Nikon D300 camera with a Nikkor 80-400 mm f/4.5-5.6 VR lens, and it worked exceptionally well. And I will soon take this tripod with me to Antarctica for the same purpose. It's a nifty, well built tripod.

Of course you could instead pay more than twice as much for a tripod that would support a far greater load than you need. But why would you want to do that?:)

Norm Dulak

Thanks very much indeed, Norm.

Hi Lance,

I recently bought the 3-section version of the Manfrotto, in part because it was 200 g lighter than their 'standard' equivalent model, and in part because of was about $300 cheaper than the highly recommended Gitzos that may folk were using. I wanted the lightest tripod that was still full size I could use for a spotting scope and photography with a 400 f5.6. At the time I had no idea that I would soon buy a 500 mm lens, and can see that the wider leg spread of something like a Gitzo is an advantage for a big lens. I've only been able to try the Manfrotto out with the big lens once and found that if I set the legs one extra click out from normal then it was fantastically stable.

Another advantage of the Manfrotto for me was that the centre column could be put horizontally - I can see me using that to photograph specimens etc. So it's certainly a light and versatile option for you. I think some of the main questions for you would be if you were needing to be shooting and eye level and whether you are OK using a centre column or whether you want a full-height platform. I wouldn't get a 4-section tripod unless it was a mighty strong one, but I spend a lot of time reading shorebird rings in windy conditions rather than photographing. But whatever you get, a carbon fibre tripod will seem like a dream compared to a metal one!

Good luck and ponderings, Phil

I have an older Benro C+228 and it holds my sidekick and 500/F4/D700 without any problems. If I were going to buy it now I would get the Travel Angel.

I have a GT3541L that I like, I have to admit I have never extended the forth section at all and its quite good for everything even my 500 f5.6. D700 and D90. So far so good...not shooting in gail force winds..yet.